Music:Proposed policies/archive
For Final Decisions Be sure to check the Policies Page! Promotion? For promotional ideas, see Promotion -- to suggest possible ways to promote, check Talk:Promotion New Main Page To test out new ideas for the Main Page, use Main Page test as a sandbox. What we are working on I am working on: #updating all my reviews; cleaning pages, rewriting reviews, fixing links #going back to artist pages I wrote and fixing the links #adding discography to labels (probably should be a link, Label:Discography (possible category?) Michael Ardaiolo I've just been plugging holes on the list, and I just went through the page and filling in holes there; so far, I've got all of them, except for Instrumental Hip-Hop and Death Cab For Cutie, both of which I know jack squat about, so I figured I'd leave those for folks who are more knowledgeable than me. Since my Instrumental Hip-Hop page would basically be "It's like, Hip-Hop without words." and my Death Cab For Cutie page would just mention that they got their name from the Bonzos and then some ranting about how cool the Bonzos are. Which, you know, might work, but... - Rev. Syung Myung Me 19:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC) ---- OK -- I know Eyeball Kid has been helping out hell of with getting albums in there, so I've helped out with that, too, and between us, we've got XTC done and Frank Zappa, David Bowie mostly done (mostly him on that one), and quite a few others like Beck. Also, I went in and plugged in a bunch of the big ones on the Wanted Pages list, which was pretty cool, although now there's a lot more, mainly songs. Also, not sure if anyone noticed, but today, February 19, 2006, we've broken 1000 articles! How about that? Especially considering we not only broke it but obliterated it as it's currently at 1100-something. So, fuckin' rock on with THAT. To commemmorate that change of stuff, I re-wrote the front page blurb a bit, since we're no longer really a New Wiki, and updated with a few things that I think need work -- like the RIYL thing especially. Also, cleaned up some of those new Wikipedia stubs, and uh, hm. Entered in a couple other Mixes I had lying around. So, um, yeah. What about everyone else? - Rev. Syung Myung Me 00:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC) ---- I also just finished up going through all the genres and filling in the linked artist/label pages, so we've got different counts on the Wanted Pages lists, which is nice, because it kicks up some of the artists and labels for which we've got album reviews but no parent artist page, so those reviews can have parents instead of being sorta isolated. Which is good, I think. Gettin' rid of those Orphaned Pages and all. - Rev. Syung Myung Me 18:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC) Name Change Just out of curiosity.. do you think a name change to Wikimusic is in order? We are no longer centering in on just the independent scene.. it just seems natural. What does every one else think? Mpardaiolo 00:54, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC) Well as it appears, Wikipedia has proposed a site under that name... it doesn't look like anything has been started, but if you google wikimusic, you can see the proposals. Does this affect the decision for pushing it forward or the other direction? The only thing that would really have to be changed would be our lovely logo; and even then, just changing the text. Is there legal implications for using that name? Or maybe something like Modern Musicpedia would be better suited. Opinions should be voiced. Mpardaiolo 01:02, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC) Possibility: Hm; in a way, I still like "Your Subculture Soundtrack", just because even though we're sort of all over the place, even the poppier stuff we hit on is still sort of embraced by the Indie-Scene. Otherwise, though, I'm not sure. If Wikipedia's going after "Wikimusic", I figure it's probably best not to try to beat them to the punch or whatever, since it just seems like that'd be riddled with headaches down the road. I kinda like "Modern Musicpedia", but I think I'd be cool with keeping YSS. I'll have to sleep on it, as I'm getting all fall-over-sideways-y, here. - Rev. Syung Myung Me 05:05, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC) I'm still sort of mulling it over, but I'm throwing a post on my LJ to see about what people who are a little more removed from this than us think -- that might provide a bit of perspective, y'know? (Also, who knows maybe someone will have a dummy logo to show us, too, which'd be cool, too!) Anyway, though, I'll report back with what, if anything, folks have to suggest! - Rev. Syung Myung Me 14:14, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC) State Of The Wiki Address Well, nothing THAT grand or anything, but yeah, whatever. Anyway, I was just going through and it's actually looking like we're doing really well. I think the current To-Do List is basically -- and correct me if you know stuff that needs to be done here -- this: * Go through the list and start plugging holes. * Promote the featured article thing more, like, getting new nominations and all that * Just start adding pages anyway. * PROMOTE the wiki * Get some new blood in. * Go out for ice cream. The pages seem to be in pretty good shape. I'm still occasionally coming across the odd one that needs to be kicked into shape, but I think it's hit a level where we can just let it go and clean them up as we see them, rather than doing a co-ordinated effort on tracking every last one of them down. I've also been going through some of the Special pages section to help fix things -- I believe there are now no dead-end pages -- they all go to at least one live page, which is good. There's a TON of orphaned pages, so perhaps we should work on that one a bit, but that's cool, too, and by going down the Wanted Pages list, we can end up taking care of a bunch of those, too. I just went through the "long pages" list and tagged out a few new ones to be Featured Article Noms -- perhaps you want to as well ("you" mainly being Michael, but extended to anyone/everyone who also happens to be reading this). I was thinking that maybe once we hit 1000 articles on the count at the top of the page, we should put in to be plugged as the Featured WikiCity or whatever, or put in for a WikiCity Textbox Sidebar Dealy, which might grab some more people. But we may want to do that sooner (but who knows, we've skyrocketed up to over 650. Anyway, I'd go on for more, but I just realized, I have to leave for work in 5 minutes and I'm not actually dressed. Crap! - Rev. Syung Myung Me word.word.word. and word. i am basically taking the top "wanted" pages and filling those in as complete as possible. i have been tremedously busy lately, so my contribution as been slack which i apologize for. hopefully i can get going here soon and updated regularly. Mpardaiolo 00:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC) I also just cleaned up the templates (figured out how to get the templates to stop showing up on the category pages -- it's the "includeonly" tag!, and got the Genre template to make it so the only thing you'll have to change is the parent genre, but not the "Linked Artists/Labels" ones), and fiddled about with cleaning up categories a little bit as well. I also tagged Patrick Masterson's reviews with his user page (which I did a placeholder for, just because a) the change in color makes it easier to see that the review is over and that's the signature, and b) if I left them all red, it'd be at the top of the Wanted Pages list, and my OCD won't allow that). Also plunked in a few more label and genre links, mainly for the parent ones (think we might have all the parent genres, now? At least, almost all of them.) and major labels, including a few redirects where they made sense (i.e. CBS to Columbia). After that, though, I've just been wracking my brain trying to figure out how to get new people involved and adding content. I think that's probably the most frustrating thing right now is that sense that we're the only ones doing stuff. But I'm still not quite sure on how best to go about recruiting... Anyway, though, that's about where I'm at. Some of the new features are pretty rad, with the new MediaWiki 1.5 upgrade. So, uh, yeah. Hooray! - Rev. Syung Myung Me 18:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC) Deleted A Bunch Of No-Content Songs A while ago, I made a bunch of no-content song pages to get songs off the Wanted Pages list, but now I'm having second thoughts, and so I went and deleted all of the empty-songs. They don't take up too much real estate on the Wanted Pages list, and, hey, it might encourage more song-notes or song-reviews. So, hey. - Rev. Syung Myung Me 18:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC) New Wiki Pages I just had an idea yesterday to add a few more pages to the wiki -- I just added the Projects category, where we can easily find stuff like the mixtape wiki and stuff like that, as well as some other stuff. I also added a few individual project pages for stuff I thought might be cool -- the Single-Artist Best Of page, and The Speakerboxxx Below Project (which could only be the first of that kind of thing -- other ideas could be, say, The White Album Project or other 2 disc sets), and perhaps the biggest one that I think could be really cool -- Radio Show Playlists where folks can put in their radio show playlists and have them be all linked up. I think that might be kinda cool. One other idea I had was to do a cross-thing with TMBW where we have a series of individuals making They Might Be Giants best-of discs. If that ends up being successful, perhaps we could do the same thing with ZappaWikiJawaka or some of the other Music Wikis out there. Just some ideas. Anyway, though, I think that that sort of thing might be pretty cool, and any other ideas for projects would be great, too. I think we're really growing well, and I think that we've hit the point where we can expand a bit (as well as the standard thing of fillin' in holes that are still there). (by the way, I might not respond this weekend since I'm going out of town, so like, don't think I'm ignorin' you or anything) - Rev. Syung Myung Me 13:37, 1 April 2006 (UTC) I agree whole-heartedly with your ideas to expand the website, and as soon as my radio show starts up again, I will add to the Radio Show Playlists. Just remember that what the site really needs now is straight up content, mostly on artists, albums, etc. So while all of these are really good ideas, remember to keep the initial idea front and center. Mpardaiolo 22:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC) The way we do song links I noted some suggestions here: Talk:A Quick Way To Generate Tracklistings For Mixes And Compilations, Using Microsoft Excel And Word:Essay Any comments? dyaimz 22:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC) :I'll bring the discussion here instead: :There are 4 ways of writing titles that allow the band & the album to be differentiated by the wiki software so that pipe-tricks can be used. :*band-name/album-name :*band-name:album-name :*album-name, band-name :*album-name (band-name) :Unfortunately, none of these match the current article-title-style. The colon style is band-name:album-name rather than album-name:band-name but there is also the problem that the colon is not preferred because it is used to denote different name-spaces. It also shares a disadvantage with band-name/album-name that in the Category lists it is easier to scan down the list if the album or song is first rather than the band. So that leaves us the comma or the parentheses options. No rationale was ever given for the present article-title-style but it is quite neat looking, so in that spirit I would recommend the comma format over the parentheses as being the closest visually to what is presently being done as well as bringing the advantages in editing of using pipe-tricks and losing the problems of clashing name-spaces. :dyaimz 00:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)